[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Newsgroup proposal: misc.anonymous
At 7:47 pm -0400 9/26/96, Mark M. wrote:
> It is still active. However, there are many people who do not receive the
> alt.* groups and those who do may only receive newsgroups "approved" by
> the news admin. It is much more difficult to restrict distribution of
> newsgroups carried by most major news feeds. Also, some NNTP servers may
> expire alt groups faster than the other hierarchies which is very undesirable
> for message pools.
It seems that if newsgroup RFC and the whole rigamarole of newsgroup voting
was set up, there would be enough people -- on this list alone, probably --
who would be interested enough in the idea to at least vote (publically)
for it. I certainly would, just to see what happens.
Of course, that means that someone *else* ;-) has to actually put the train
on the track, much less lay the rails, which, as usual, is the main problem
here. If we had some ham, we could have some ham and eggs, if we had some
eggs. If you lived here, you'd be home now. And so forth.
Same as it ever was.
Robert Hettinga ([email protected])
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender."
-- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard,
for Bart Simpson
The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/